unlock the door and take them. that's how hard it is to catch them. they're in custody. to dedicate the entire program of i.c.e. to warren proposition, to deport illegal aliens are criminals, they don't have to go out and chase anybody. they have them all incarcerated. it's not that hard. but that's what the target is for this year. and i think it's just -- it sounds great on television, but the truth is, i think anybody that's a normal american wouldn't even consider releasing somebody that has been to prison for a serious crime. of course, if you have a chance to deport them, you want to deport them. here is something interesting. there is a sector of the border, the border of the homeland folks

and border patrol divide it by sector and that is the dellrio sector and there is operation streamline with the cooperation of the judges, courts and prosecutors -- and let me tell you, this isn't easy, but hard work and these people are to be commended for what they do. they set up a process that those people coming across the border in the del rio section of the border would go before the judge and have a hearing, every one of them. now, you say, why is that a big deal? well, because the president of the united states and the homeland security department just declared 17,000 people will never go before a judge. not on that issue. because they -- unless they refile the cases, which they've done -- it's done with prejudice they can come back and refile

the cases. but unless they refile the cases, these people will never answer to a court. why would you want them to answer to a court? courts are so crowded. sure but some judges willing to work hard to do what's right by the law in the del rio sector made the del rio sector the least border crossed area on the border why? because there's something about looking a judge straight in the eye and they tell you, sir, or madam, you have violated the laws of the united states by coming across our border that makes those people say, i'm not going to see the judge again. i'm going to cross someplace else. now, maybe we should be setting up a system like that to cover the whole border. maybe that would help a whole lot. we should provide the resources to do it. the real point comes back to at least 17,000 people will never

look that judge in the eye based upon the actions of the obama administration. and maybe they wouldn't -- some of those people may have gone back across and applied to come in legally. we're the only country that brings in one million foreigners a year into our country legally. nobody can match us. nobody can come close in the entire world. the united states opens our doors to a million people to follow the rules and come into this country. yes, you can call it compassion, but it is random compassion. who said these people, determined by the white house, are more deserving of compassion than these people over here because we've got, according to most of the estimates, between 12 million and 20 million of these people in our country. so, why -- who decides and who picks those 17,000? and are we starting a policy that everybody that's awaiting a

hearing in a immigration court will just be excused? is that the new policy? so 17,000 is just a start? i don't know, we don't have an answer to that. but the real question we have to be concerned about is, who made the executive branch so independent to operate that they can shut down things like drilling in the gulf and turn loose people who have pending court cases on their say-so? without any consultation or action by the legislative branch of the government or any declaration for enforcement by the judicial branch of the government. i think that's a rule of law question. we in this house ought to be talking about it. i don't think when we wrote this

constitution of the united states we ever envisioned getting -- giving that kind of power to any individual person or even any branch of the government. and i think we have reason to show real concern. when you read something like this. "the houston chronicle." covering the dockets started a month ago and it stunned local immigration attorneys. i'm sure it stunned them because they're not going to get a fee. in addition they got benefits they never even sought. they weren't seeking dismissals, they were seeking probably things like, well, i won't go into that. other remedies in the court. and they got the cases dismissed. without even knowing they were going to be dismissed.

they're as confused as everybody else. now i'm not saying it wasn't done for the right reason, i don't know why it was done. i don't know who makes the random pick of 17,000 people out of 20 million. who makes that choice? is that the choice one individual needs to make? is it the immigration czar who decides who gets that and who doesn't? or is it the sec are retear of homeland security? or is it the president of the united states? and under what authority do they have the right to do this. and is it what you -- the kind of world you want to live in, where one person has the ability to make a decision that basically sidesteps the judicial system of the country? because they like you? or whatever -- i don't know. we don't know why they did it. do we want the president of the united states coming into the

judicial system of the country and saying, you know what, we've got so many criminal cases pending that are just too crowded a docket, we're going to dismiss all but the murder cases. because we think the only thing that's really serious is murder. so wipe out the rest of the docket. is that -- that seems ridiculous. and it is ridiculous. but at what point does that authority not granted by any other source to one man, where -- what curtails it? unless we ask about it and we ask what law allows this to happen? who gets to make these decisions to circumvent the written law of the united states. and why do they get that power? there may be a good answer. i haven't heard one. and those who questioned it in

the press and those who have questioned it with letters such as mr. bilirakis and ms. -- and marsha blackburn, another great member of congress have asked that question, and to my understand having not received any answer. by what authority is this done? i may be the only voice talking here tonight but every country ought to have somebody, every straight ought to have somebody standing up and asking these questions because the only, only supreme authority other than god almighty is this constitution of the united states in this document and the offshoots of this document lie the powers of the people who serve up here in washington, d.c. and around the country. this is serious stuff we're talking about the rule of law. this is stuff we ought to worry about.

finally, i want to say that the sad thing being reported in some of these newspaper articles that this is the third -- this is deferred action. which really concerned me for those of us who have been trying to actually come up with the real solutions, to be fair and yet be just to all americans. just have possibly one of the tools that could have been used by this congress, established by the written document called the law, possibly taken away from us because of the bad taste it's going to leave in the american public's mouth. i am very concerned about that because quite honestly, it was one of the possible solutions we could deal with. i'm not going to go into that other than to say that i hope

when we do sit down and do a compassionate solution to the immigration problem, it takes into consideration not only the invading immigrants but takes into consideration the rest of the country that has invaded to come up with a solution to this problem. that we haven't in some way by the actions of the white house tainted one method that might have been used to start to correct some portion of the problem. finally, let me say, the reason there's passion in my state on this issue is because more people died in the war run by the cartels across the border in our -- right across the border, 100 yards from american citizens who live along the border, there have been, i think it's something like 25,000 people murdered, which is way more than

the casualty rate for our forces in iraq and afghanistan. police officers and police officials, mayors, anyone who stands up and says, we ought to enforce the law over here, is killed, maimed, butchered, beheaded, and anarchy reigns, not because of the good intentions of the mexican government, but because of the evil that permeates the lawlessness on the mexican-u.s. border. and we have to be concerned about what's happening on our borders. all of us in this couldn't arery have to be concerned. because that evil is there and it's just -- in texas, it's a swim across the river away in arizona it's one footstep, new

mexico it's one footstep away from being in our state. and then across the country, and some of the -- some of these drug gangs now have agents in every major and minor city in this country. ms-13 and other gangs like that, the studies show they have spread across the nation. when we're talking about, yes, we've got lots of issues that have to do with good folks who live good lives and who are here illegally, we need to work on that but don't ever forget if you give up portion of the law, you could lose the lew -- you could lose it all. when you lose it all, who is going to stand between you and the bad guys? that's why we've got to keep talking about the rule of law is the glue that holds our society together. and if we give it up, whether it is for what is viewed today as a

compassionate good will reason or not, if we give up strength of the law that keeps our society together, we weaken our society. and then ultimately those people who would do you harm through violence and terror will be able to control the world we live in. that's why our soldiers go to war to fight across the ocean to prevent that from happening in our country and to help countries where it is happening toest pablish -- establish rule of law so they can prevent the destruction of their society. that's why great american soldiers go fight those wars. that's why we have the police force and the fire department and other departments that protect us. but if you take away the tools by some group deciding we can just, by the stroke of a pen, eliminate a certain bunch of rules we don't like, where does

it stop? this is a serious issue for the rule of law. i raise it for discussion among the members of this house and among the people of this country. is this the way we make it better for our lives? thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back.

the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman from texas have a motion? mr. carter: i understand he's on his way but is his time up?

i move we adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is agreed to. accordingly the house stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow. ,

telling the american story. here historic speeches and eyewitness accounts of the events that shaped the nation. top history professors and leading historians delve into america's path. american history tv, all weekend, every weekend. >> our panel of scholars and advocates on the relationship

between discrimination and family structure. this is an hour and 20 minutes. >> >> in an attempt to stay within time constraints, let's get started. in our last panel, james patterson took us through the report entitled -- a case for national action. cases for a national action." this seems prophetic 15 years later.

when moynihan wrote his report in 1965, 25% of black children were born out of wedlock. now 70% of black children are born out of wedlock. dr. ronald haskins estimates that over the entire time of childhood, something like 80% of black children experience live in a single-parent family. we believe this has consequences. other research confirms that property rates for children in single-family headed households are five times higher extend those reared in a two-parent homes. interestingly, the rates for whites is now a similar for what it was for whites when that senator moynihan first rang the alarm. before i go on, i just want to said that this is a very difficult topic. there are a lot of sensitivities. i think it is extremely important that we all make an

effort to speak carefully and sensibly about this issue. during this conversation no one is blaming, no one is saying that anyone is less than, but we are saying that overall statistically speaking there are significant adverse consequences that flow from children not being raised in a two-parent household. marriages begin in marriages end. there are instances where marriages should end. the only thing i am suggesting again is that we take a look at the importance of family, families, and let's look at the consequences of that when you have a significant portion of

the population were the children are being cleared in a single- family home. call after saying that, i would like to begin the introduction of our -- after saying that i would like to begin the introduction of our panel. they will discuss the relationship between family structure, race and socio- economic status, including the extension to which family structure continues to decline in labor participation rates. and each of these issues further erode the health of families. and we will start, today we have with us kay hamowitz. she writes extensively on education and child in america. she is author ever read that book "marriage and cash" in

america. she examines the breakdown of marriage in the united states and how it threatens the nation's future. but she has written for mini major publications -- she has written for many major publications. we have here a holder, a professor for public policy at georgetown university. he is the former chief economist at the u.s. department of labor and professor of economics at michigan state university. he has many affiliations in the research field, and i am sure that he will bring that to bear during this conversation.

[inaudible] she was a war that bradlees prize for outstanding intellectual achievement. her work has canvassed the work of topics, including homeland security, policing and racial profiling, homelessness and educational policy to name a few. her writings have appeared in most of the nation's top news dailies. she is author of two books on race and police profiling respectively. she has worked at the federal court of appeals and worked in the executive branch. our next panelist is roland

rolins. he has played a key role in helping the organization established strategic partnerships with businesses, governments, and non-profit organizations across the country. he frequently appears in print and television, representing the national fatherhood initiative. and prior to joining n.f.i. he worked for goldman sachs. he served on the father of a task force of the white house aide based neighbor partnership. he has also served as a board member for the national campaign to prevent teenager and unplanned pregnancy. on that bill, we will begin. we will go straight down the line and begin with professor holder. >> thank you, and good morning.

as german reynolds and i am a labor economist. i know about employment and jobs than have to change marriage rates, but i have read some of that literature. i want to make a couple of points about that, and try to have broader view at about why trends have gone this way. let me start with the points. it seems that all the speakers have taken for granted that simple. hud has a really negative effect on young people growing up in those families. -- thini think that has really d a negative of back on young people growing up in those families. you have hadwe know that that ae

highly correlated with growing up in a single-family. that does not prove that the single-parent is causing this. it remains in question, how you sort those things out? frankly, these young people bring many other deficits with them in their personal life and based many other structural barriers. can we disentangle what pieces were caused by single parents or other problems? is surprisingly difficult to do that. after decades of people trying to do that, they have identified how hard it is to identify. i will cite one well-known study in the quarterly journal of economics. the compared scissors that were left in the same family, low-

income families. they compared the sister who had a teen pregnancy and the one that did not. the sister who did not get pregnant did a little bit better, but not that much better. they come from low-income families with many other carriers and many other challenges, and it is those things, as well as single parent, that contributes to the problems. my point is not the structural family does not matter, it does, but we had to think about it broadly interacting with other challenges if we're all and that any hope of turning this around. if you believe this is a bad trend, what explains it? as an economist i have a real trouble with culture. i do not know what that means. when you talk about attitude and behavioral norms, i do

understand that. i am actually -- my views are very consistent with governor paterson said in the previous panel. i think the economic changes in the cultural factors interact very important. the civil rights era, which is an era of rising expectations, has coincided with a very dramatic changes in the labor markets. the truth is that good jobs have been disappearing for less educated men, good paying jobs, have been disappearing for educated men for almost the entire civil rights era. you see this for wightman, latino men, but it has had less educated black men very hard. -- you this for white men,

latino men, but it has hit less educated black men very hard. there is a whole literature analyzing why that has occurred. technological change. the weakening of institutions that has traditionally protected less educated workers. the jobs they needed disappeared and their attempt to adapt to the new labor market are hampered by a whole variety of challenges starting with the achievement gap. the achievement gap attempts to explain that seems to be correlated with going to racially segregated schools and living in racially segregated neighborhoods. not impossible to turn the schools around, but it is more challenging to have good teachers and administrators work and those schools. once you get to the labor market, there is still discrimination. there is a breakdown of informal

networks that traditionally have connected people to good jobs as the young boys see so many of the older males and their families, their brothers, fathers, disappearing completely from the labor market. the networks that connect the people in the labor market are gone. in this country we have denigrated high-quality career technical education. it was not very good in its traditional form. you can understand why people work upset about tracking, but in fact, we have good, high- quality academic versions of career technical education starting with career economies. look closely at the evidence. it is stunning. they did not preclude going on to college.

they quite in the range of options. -- they have quite a range of options. my view is that some young people have lost hope because they did not perceive opportunity to make it in the labor market. that is very fertile soil for all of the other be neighbors to develop. there is a whole process that occurs, not only people withdrawn from school in the labor market, but withdrawn from a whole set of mainstream behavior's and institutions like marriage and like living within the law. you see this whole pattern of high school dropout rates, deterioration and labor force participation, along with the rise and incarceration and their rise of being identified as an on custodial parent.

one-third of all young black men end up incarcerated. the stunning #, they odds are you'll end up in prison 221. -- two to one. as you come out of prison with a criminal record and do our getting your earnings tax and a very high rate, it is almost impossible to reconnect to the labor market in a serious way. what does this mean for policy? again, i do not know how to change marriage rates and childbearing rates, but then as something about education and employment. i think it starts with creating the perception and reality that there is opportunity for these young people in the education system and labor market. and we have heard a lot about harlem children. i'd like all of those programs. -- i like all of those programs.

more broadly beneath efforts to improve the quality of teaching and curriculum in segregated, lower-income neighborhoods and we need to broaden that and bring back career technical education so people have range of options. there is an effort to prevent disconnection along all of the dimensions that we talk about. we used to have employment and education -- employment training programs. those have trouble to almost nothing and the federal budget. the truth is not all of them were very good or successful, but some of them work. we need to rebuild their education and work force system. we need secondary schools working within the system of workforce development so that young people seek the job opportunities that do exist out

there if they complete a program of opprobrious steady and appropriate skill building. -- , a program of appropriate study inappropriate skill building. -- a program of opprobrious stuappropriate study and appropriate skill building. finally, some men will go that route. some will become offenders. there are reforms in the criminal justice system, the child support system that could improve their opportunities. when need to help them reconnect a society when they leave prison, not put additional barriers.

the earned income tax credit, which has been so successful at subsidizing low income mons to go into the labor market, we need a similar thing extended to non-custodial dad's so that they face a better set of incentives, as well as opportunities to do the right thing and connect to the labor market and take more responsibility for the children they father. thank you. [applause] >> good morning, everyone. markoff be needed. -- more coffee needed. i need more encouragement. i am delighted to be with you today. a core part of what we're focused on is really trying to

connect fathers to their kids hart to hart, and a big part of our strategy is focused on skill building and really hoping that speed that best that they can be boiled -- and really helping dad be the best dads they can be. we found that nearly half of the father is that we surveyed said they did not have the skills that they needed. then we ask a question to what degree did you feel replaced by mom or some other guy? we found that over half said they were replaced by mom or some other guy. you put those together and it really speaks to a significant issue that we need to address. qúlet me just start quickly wia definition. this is from my perspective.

it is not an academic definition. it is the way i thought about the whole civil rights issue for a long time. for me, when we talk about civil rights, it really has a perspective of this notion of being able to basically self- determination, the notion that in the civil society we have an ability to control ourselves and to go after things and we have an opportunity to make choices that will lead to success, happiness, of the month, and all of those types of things. civil rights is about the notion of self-determination and the notion that are rightly determined salt will not be denied these kinds of opportunities. -- that a rightly-determined self will not be denied these

kinds of opportunities. i rented a miniseries by arthur haley. it is about him finding out that he was connected to a slave. i remember renting this video and there is a scene in the video -- there are couple of scenes that most people remember. one is when the slaves was first captured and he turned his naive me to toby. i think for a lot of people they remember that scene and what it meant. there is another scene in that movie, which i think actually illustrates the point of this series, and i think it leads to the perspective that we are talking about today. and there is a scene that where he has run away several times.

he is caught, and each time he is caught he is punished so finally they cut his foot off. when they do that, he is an opportunity to meet bell, one of the other slaves. she nurtures him and get him a job driving the carriage for the master because she knows he has this desire to run. one day he is putting the horses away in teaand hears the beat os drumb, so h, so he follows the beach and bynes another slave playing the drums the old man tells him on a certain day this be will play and that will mean that we're going to run. he runs back and tells bell. she says, "oh, my gosh."

she said my first husband was killed. she lets him know that he is about to be a father. andtob toby says i am not going to run. the baby is born and they had the tradition that their car to take the baby into the night air intak. when he takes the baby into the air, what does he here? kebbel here's the be as well. she comes running out of the house. -- bell hears the bellat as well. she says to him, the drums, the drums. this is your home. he stiffens up and says this is

not my home, and he is absolutely determined. she just melts into a puddle of tears. he says but this is my child, and we are family. he wraps his arms around her and walks are back in. then he begins to tell his daughter the story of their history. for me, that is an important point. it is the child's that his group is all about. here's a man with the social rights, no civil rights, but took the one thing that has the ability to do, the notion around self-determination. that is the civil rights movement right there. the ability to stay. in terms of the work i do, the statistics and all the other stuff, at the end of the day, it is about individuals making a certain decision that the government cannot take from you,

nobody can take from you. you can decide within yourself that i am determined to stay. from my perspective, that is what this is about. what does this have to do about the whole so rights than? i really think that when you look at the statistics, a part of this, -- i can tell you that the father of a teenage mother that the notion of being able to stay in determining to do that is one of the most powerful things. i think from a cultural perspective, i think that as part of what the challenge is, that the drumbeat is not happening. my voice heard that drumbeat from their fault there. i-- my boys heard that drumbeat from their father.

. i think it is really important, a cultural perspective that we are communicating this message, because it is a powerful one. we have a powerful message in the white house. the whole notion that the president being a different father than the one he had. that is because he is married to michelle. if she was in the white house and and he was an outhousin an , they would not have that connection. i found it really interesting, there is a memorial in the annapolis, maryland. it is the kunta kente alex hailey memorial. it says the strength teaches universal lessons, including survival through based, strength 3 family, and wisdom

through forgiveness. strength through family. it is the strength through family, particularly in the african-american community is really what got us through slavery. i believe sincerely that it is the strength through the family that we must recapture again. thank you very much. a[applause] >> thank you. i am very honored to be at the u.s. civil-rights commission. i never thought i would be having such an opportunity in my life and be with such an extraordinary panel. i am delighted to see that there seems to be an emerging consensus already at this conference about the crucial importance of family breakdown

in understanding the black situation today. rather than repeating on a more general basis on that topic, i thought i would get a case study of one city of where i think these issues can be seen very clearly, and that is to talk about youth violence in chicago. and the political and media response to it. i think that response is emblematic of our society's refusal to acknowledge much less address, the most important factor behind inner-city crime. last september a cell phones video of a group of chicago teenagers beating a student to death when they are rowent vira. because doggo was so closely

associated with the obama administration and the olympics, the media ignored the most interesting part of this story, however, the fact that the killing occurred in the very south side neighborhoods where barack obama had so famously work as a community organizer in the 1980's in roseland. had the press dain to take note of that fact, it might have uncovered a tragic past of myopia regarding the primary cause of urban violence. when obama arrived in chicago in 1984, you'd killings were already away of life. -- yotuuth killings were already away of life. and 1987, 57 chicago children were killed by gunfire. neither obama nor the political establishment have either the insight or the courage to

address the most important context of the spiralling youth violence, family breakdown. 75% of chicago's black children born at of wedlock in 1984. and while media reports on youth violence, occasionally mention the mother of the perpetrators or the victim, it was absolutely taboo to ask where is the fall there? that to aboo continues unchanged today. obama never makes a connection between the disappearance of the father and a social dysfunction that was engulfed in chicago's south side. when obama sees boys engaging in vandalism, she askhe asks, "whee are the social workers or the

politicians that will take care of them? i do not mean to single him out for special criticism. he was no different from any other community activists then or now or politician for that matter. the pattern of youth crime that was already established during obama chicago years in the 1980's continue through the next 2.5 decades. in 1994, an 11-year-old member of the black disciples gain killed a girl while shooting at a and paralyzing a rival gang member. they then executed him fto prevent him from testifying in court. and so it was with the beating last september. and the 35-year-old mother of the 18-year-old who stomped

albert on the head while she was light on the ground unconscious told me that her son's father was "not ready to be a strong black role model in his son's life." the younger brother of the 18- year-old assailant has a different father. he, too, is absent from the home. the father of the big dumb solidary and once the day she was -- the father of the victim saw him once, the day she was bohe was born. it means that many children in chicago are now uncertain about the extent of their family ties. one girl that i spoke to thinks that she has 10 siblings by five fathers. but she was not quite sure.

every city in america has a strong connection between race, a legitimate ec -- illegitimacy, and violent crime. in cook county, the black illegitimacy rate is now up to 79%. professor patterson it can go higher÷z, unfortunately, then . the black illegitimacy rate in inner-city chicago would be higher still. in chicago, black youth creat 87% of gun violence. the white illegitimacy rate in cook county is 15% sen. anthis disparity is identical in

new york. the black illegitimacy rate is over 78%. blacks commit 80% of all shootings, " there are 24% of the population. the white illegitimacy rate in new york is 7%. blacks commit less than 2% of all shootings, though there are 35% of the population. nationally the black illegitimacy rate is around 71%. black males between the ages of 14 and 17 commit homicide at 10 times the rate of a white and hispanic males of that same age combined. we're not going to solve the black crime problem unless we can reconstitute the plaque tell black family.

i would respond to professor oldhollzer that growing up in a culture where marriage is disappeared that would affect one child and the other identically. the tragic effects of a culture of religion is the -- at illegitimacy are not limited to one aspect of a child's life. the greater problem is boys growing up in a culture where men are no longer expected to raise their own children. in such a world, and boys still to learn the most basic lesson of responsibility. marriage civilizes men. free from that necessity, boys never need to become reliable breadwinners and stable adults. there is no greater handicaps

that affects black children's life chances than the fact that there overwhelmingly more likely than the children of any other racial and ethnic group to grow up without a father and to grow up in the world where marriage is disappeared. i would suggest as well that that affects the work prospects as well, that they have not developed those habits. we could give every fatherless black child his own social worker and government checks, and we still will not eliminate the crime and achievement gaps. for while it seemed like barack obama new this also. speaking on chicago's outside in 2008, he addressed the connection between fatherless and youth violence. "if we're honest with ourselves, we will admit that too many fathers are missing from too

many lives and homes. " yet when he dispatched eric holder arctic 2009 in the hope that this using the p r crisis of the shooting, these administration officials bought only the usual no strums about haiti collective responsibility for youth violence and the prpromise of more federal spending. what i would do is to spend every waking minute trying to read alibis fathers. -- revitalize fathers. we need to be able to say that there are fantastic, courageous single mothers who are able on their own to raise law-abiding

civilized boys, but on average boys need fathers. a cultural needs to recognize the importance of fathers. this will require taking on the feminist myth that women can do it all. thank you very much. [applause] >>ok0c as you are about to heare girls at the manhattan institute think very similarly. ñri want to reiterate a point me at the beginning that it is nice to hear and see. i believe it is absolutely central to the future of black america.

there is a connection between a family structure and racial disparity. it is difficult to finally determined that just from a social science. let's just remind ourselves of what the social science has said. it is said that kids in married couple families -- this is not just about blacks at all. that kids in married families get better grades. they are more likely to graduate from high school. they are more likely to go to college and graduate. they are far less likely to be port and abuse drugs, commit crime, to become pregnant at an early age and to become single parents themselves. these benefits are true for kids when you control the family income.

what else have researchers discovered? that have found that on average married men at work more hours. they make more money, and they achieve more seniority at their jobs. they have shown us that married people are healthier and live longer, and no, it is not as the old joke have is, married men and women actually live longer, it does not just feel that way. [laughter] y? why is there a connection between marriage and child outcomes? experts have had a few ideas about that. one of them, and this is the idea that is shared by most people, is what i call the strength in numbers theory. it makes some sense. let me explain it to you. married couples have two incomes. they have two brains to problem-

solving. as to waking up at night. it makes sense. there is a problem with this theory. children of stepfamilies also have peace, but their outcomes are not much different according to the research, then those from single-mother households. they are less likely to be po or. that is true probably because they have the benefit of two incomes. they have problems with drugs, early sexual activity, less likely to graduate from high school and college. the strength in numbers theory only takes us so far. i would like to suggest that we think about this in a different way. that is the question of why marriage matters? why marriage matters,

particularly for children and for men. it is not the individual couples, per cent, it is the idea of marriage or what heather referred to as the culture of marriage. marriage is what anthropologists call a schuman is universal. it exists and has excess and every known human society. -- marriages what anthropologists call the human universal. it is what society expects from them. i think what happens as a result of that is that marriage is the way the society's provide a matter of life and models of behavior. -- provide a map of life and models of behavior. marriage carries with it debt assumption that the couple is committed to each other, that

they will be people to each other, that they will raise their children together. women who bear children have a natural connection to their offspring, but marriage is the way kolter has announced that men are also tied to their children and tells them what the responsibilities towards them are. and i do not need to remind you that people today are failing to live up to these norms. nevertheless, by walking down the aisle, by getting married, people are saying this is how i aspire to live. let's think of marriage as a map. by looking at to 23 year-old men. joe lives in the world where marriage continues to be the norm. he assumes he will marry one day. he is probably not very conscious of it. he is not walking around saying my name is joe and i subscribe

to the idea of marriage. he may not think you will get married until the age of 40 or until he is 50. he may be terrified of ever getting married, but he walks around with the notion deepen his brain that being part of the family, having a children reaching having children, it means getting married. -- having children means getting married. job number to find himself asking several questions. -- joe number two finds himself asking several questions. sadly, joe realizes that carol is not the one that he wants to marry. after a few more months or maybe a year, because he thinks he is young, he breaks off the relationship or maybe she does when he realizes he is just not

that into her. the relationship is over and they move on. joe number two drew up without a marriage mpa. -- map. his mother never married his father, who was only an occasional visitor in his life. his aunts and uncles never married. his friends are not married. he has also been dating carol number two for a few months. he is not asking questions like in my serious? as a someone i can imagine being with the rest of my life? will soon make a good mother? he is not also asking how will i support this woman and the children to be. instead, he is in a state of direct. he lets things happene and he ad carol have a baby boy together.

he adores his son. takes into the park. but soon he and carol karr are fighting a lot. he has been eyeing a woman named betty. she is there with her two year- old daughter. i do not need to tell you how the idea is going to play out. having children with more than one man or woman has become commonplace. i think absence of the map poses a special problem for men, and explain something about the difficulties black men are having in school, in the labor force, and the criminal justice systems, and in their role as fathers. women had children to take care of. young, black single mothers to go back to college, and there

are an increasing number of them, almost always cite their children as the reason for their ambition. they want to give their children better lives and provide a good model for them. without marriage, men become outsiders to family life. without marriage, men's connection to their children is fragile and the responsibilities they. why go back to school? weiss said the in the first place? nobody needs them. -- why go back in the first place? i would add the real lack of hope has to do with the fact that he has no social roles to play in the family. thank you. [applause] >> i would like to thank members on this panel. i thought that the comments

made were outstanding. i would like to open this up with a question for kay. yes, kay, this is directed at you. how do we go about resuscitating the ideal of marriage in black communities? i am not sure we have ever faced this type of problem before. the closest i can get is the turn of the 20th century, but how do we do this, and also, who does it? who takes the lead? is that the government? is that the church? is the other community-based organizations? i toss that out for you. >> thanks a lot. isn't that the subject of the next panel.

[laughter] i am joking, but it is really an impossible question to answer finally. i think one thing we have to do, the first thing we have to do, is to make this the primary topic of discussion in our policy world, even if there are not specific policy answers to the problem. and as heather was pointing out, this has been a topic that people are really shied away from. as you mentioned when you started the panel, it is a very difficult topic. it is easier to not talk about it. there does seem to be an assumption that by talking about it we're blaming individuals. i do not see it that way. i see as a cultural problem. -- i see this as a cultural problem. i see this was trying to create

a sense of consensus about this topic. having put forward any change deliberately -- there have been stories in history where it happened through religious revival. can that happen now? i have no idea. but the first thing that has to happen is an open and honest discussion of this sort that morning and started many years ago. -- that professor moynihan started many years ago. >> there are times where the social scientistce has to catch. i think that many of us see a problem that flows out of these families that are missing an

important player, the father. in terms of that despair that you mentioned and then dropping out of mainstream society. i know that you crunch numbers. i also know you have accumulated a fair amount of wisdom over the years in this area. do you have any thoughts on how to get the men back into a family setting? >> you are right, just because the social sciences have not proved it statistically does not mean it is not true. i do not to argue it is not true. and all of these things --

studies that control for this and that's, you get a lot smaller. there are a lot of things they cannot control for. it is a dead end. i think there are things we can all agree on. i senthink responsibility and self discipline are very important in life. i do not know how you teach about responsibility go hand-in- hand with opportunity. i do not know that any of us would have developed responsibility with housing and passout a path of opportunity. you have to have the belief that it will lead somewhere. by the way, the young women meeting those young men do not regard them as being

marriageable material. these young men who never held a steady job for very long. the whole thing, teaching responsibilities without having the opportunity component is a dead end, but we have to have growth. the gaps are very early in life. before children step foot in kindergarten, coming at of low- income or minority families they are already way behind in terms of achievement. the schools exacerbate baghdad. i think if we can all agree that opportunity and responsibility go hand in hand and the message is to have to improve both of them, we can all agree on that, and that creates a path forward. had we prevent the achievement gaps from starting so early in life? by the time that people become adolescents and much more susceptible to the call to messages that you described, we have to of the counter message.

-- we have to have this counter message. you can become a machinist. you can go to college. and by the way, your odds of completing that are much better if you read the irresponsibly ir personal life. then you have a message where all of the key components are there in the appropriate policy pieces can support that message. i think that is the way we need to think about it. >> i think those are interesting points, but it seems to me you keep importing into your analysis precisely the behavioral issues that one could use to counteract your charge. if i can simplify it, an argument that we have to look first at the jobs and economic picture to start explaining the

breakdown and culture, because you said yourself that the disparities begin by the time the child is 3 years old. this is long before that child has any sense of what you would claim is an inadequate job picture. i would say the problem begins and the culture of child rearing, and the fact that young boys, you said, have not held steady jobs -- again, that may come from the fact that they have not developed those habits of self discipline. we have in many cities today a very powerful control group, which is immigrants, who come with less financial capital then many blacks today, and yet they are finding jobs. a. .

i would just push back on any perspective that says the problem is jobs. there are scholarships galore and preferences for blacks, and rightly so or wrongly so, but there's not a single college today that is not desperate to get as many black students in it as it can. there's not a single corporation today. the paths of opportunity are there. they do not necessarily have the social capital to take advantage of them. >> there once was a world where young men without college degrees could make it and do

well, and that was the world in which a stable family often flourished, when man had a good- paying job. that world has largely disappeared. there is an affirmative action, and those things are nice, but if you are a young man, reading at the eighth grade level in 12th grade and not seeing any jobs in your neighborhood in -- for a person of your skill, that is and then the idea. you talk about young men who have not seen any of the men in their families, neighborhoods, communities, getting these jobs, so they did not know where it is coming from. i think that as a whole different situation. immigrants have a hope across generations of making it. there is a strong road map. mexican-americans, two

generations or three generations out lag significantly. it is very different. employers prefer democrats for the lower-paying jobs. if you grew up in guatemala, a low-paint shop in united states will look very good. if your family has been here generations and that is the best you can see, it will not motivate you in the same way. the immigrant experience is fairly limited. >> i talked to many in the inner city and they say, we want work ethic and show us every day on time, i'm willing to train them. they don't have to have many skills. there are factories in new york city that are desperate to find people. and that's what immigrants bring more than anything else is a work ethic. >> exclusively low wage jobs.

>> i'm going to have to step in between you two at least for the moment. [laughter] >> mr. warren. the organization does great work. this message is stayed. how do you go about delivering the message and can it be replicated? start off by telling us what you do. >> it was alluded to at the start. our whole strategy is focused on this notion of helping fathers have a more holistic view of what their role actually is. and i think just going back to this marriage argument and i'm newer to this game, but when i first started doing this work, i never heard it before. so i said what is it? when i got the definition of what it was, it was defined

around economics. guys' marriageable. that doesn't make him marriageable. professional athletes would be the best husbands in the world because they have the economic piece, but it's the culture that many of them come from that doesn't lead to that. marriage has to be defined to be a much broader word that includes the kinds of things we are talking about, skills, relationship skills, communication skills, parenting skills, that what marriage is about, not the ability to just bring a check. as long as we talk about it in that context, it will tell a guy who is unemployed or underemployed, you have no role here. part of my strategy is, you have to talk about what good fathers do. namely three things. they provide, nurture and guide, provide, nurture and guide.

guys get the whole provide stuff that the culture is wired around it. guys get that whether they have jobs. if you don't provide you don't bring nothing to the table and therefore you have no reason to be involved. but if you broaden -- what good fathers will do, they nurture, having the skills that you need in order to be a good effect tiffer parent and instilling values in your kids. so even if you are unemployed or underemployed, you still have the ability to do those other things. and to the degree you do those, those are the things that affect the kid. my father wasn't at my football games. those are the things that got me

to leave the lucrative world of goldman sachs. i think that's part of the problem we have. i want to make one other point. in terms of this whole debate, guys are pretty concrete creatures. we like stuff to be defined and laid out. and i think one of the challenges that we have that comes with this whole notion of marriage and relationships, part of the problem is there is not a definition of what that is. i'm here in washington now. let's talk about healthy relationships. first there is a healthy marriage. well, what is that, healthy relationship? i don't know what that means. what does that mean? if you tell me a healthy marriage, does that mean i sleep with other women or not? does that mean i should maybe take a lesser job so you can move forward. does that mean i save towards

retirement or raise my kids? i have no idea. but these are all questions that anybody who has sex with somebody else has to answer at some point if a child comes out of that process. so words mean stuff. and part of the reason we are seeing this erosion, it's not defined. it's not defined in a way people can get their arms around it and that's the biggest problem around the marriage thing. and going back to this notion about labor with opportunities, i get that. i go back to the kente thing was. he knew what it was to be married. and it was those seeds that were planted then that gave us this reality. i'm focused on that. because that's very doable. i will say this one last point. my mother was a teen mom and they were married and got divorced very early on in the

process. one of the powerful things that my mother did, which i didn't realize what was happening until much later in life, is she never denigrated the institution of marriage even though it didn't happen for her. she instilled in me the importance of that. when i got my girlfriend pregnant. i'm not sure how -- i'm working on that piece, but it took place. we have been married for 30 years. when i got her pregnant, in my script was this whole notion of marriage because my mother instilled that in me. people get all twisted and say i'm not married -- kids sit in a chair and across them is somebody or nobody, but who communicates a set of values. even if marriage hasn't worked out for you and it's -- your kid is still go to go have to make a decision about this. and i haven't met anyone yet -- my mom is a single mom -- i

haven't heard anyone say, i hope my daughter is a single mother. and i hope he will get her pregnant and leave her. [laughter] >> i'm just saying. are you here? if that's not what we want, then we need to be communicating, yes, ok, your dad and i were not married. but let me tell you about the institution and what that means. you see a young boy going through that process and when i talk to single moms, i say what kind of father is he going to be? no one talked to me about what kind of father i was going to be. >> hold that thought. >> i'll keep talking. i'm done. [laughter] >> mismacdonald your discussion of the connection between the lack of fathers and crime i find interesting.

iowa sitting down thinking about any -- i was sitting down thinking about my own son. we teach our boys roles whether it be the formal lessons or not and we teach them among other things, when it's appropriate to employ violence and we teach them in most cases and we teach them that violence is not one of the first tools in the tool box that you reach for. there are defined, limited instances where society as a whole and fathers in general will tell their boys it's ok. having boys that don't get that lesson and don't get that reinenforcement -- well, you are suggesting it results in out of control crime rates. so that's the challenge. if the father is not in the

home, if the message doesn't come from the family unit, if the message is not coming from the community, how is that message introduced, this message of restraint, this conversation and lesson over violence when it's appropriate and when it's inappropriate? are >> well, i'm a big fan of the boy scouts. i think they are a totally unjustly maligned group and one that is just ignored and there are other possible organizations out there, but they work to instill a code of valor and manlyness and a belonging and the inner city troops that i have attended just break your heart in the beauty of this

effort to give kids a sense of aspiration and structure and looking up to their scout master. so there are organizations out there that can, i think, work as a remote surrogate for paternal discipline, but again, i would emphasize it's not just the lack of for any individual boy that his father is not at home. and we've heard the sort of standard conceit that boys then growing up without a father will tend to gravitate towards gangs where they can get that surrogate male authority. but again, the problem is not just the boy doesn't have a father, but he's growing up in a world where marriage is not

assumed. and this gets both to kay's script and roland's script, which is that all those moments trying to think about how do i make myself attractive towards a woman, how am i go go to be a bread winner and the support and nurturing that roland talks about, they never have to think about that. and so the natural unrulyness of males and the desire to live for the moment never gets restrained towards the future goal of marriageability. and how do we start value orizing this, and this may be naive, but we have changed mores, but how many campaigns are there against teen smoking.

and this is a problem. teen smoking a bad thing. but i would argue there -- this is trivial in comparison. if you want to talk about health risks, look at the rate of death by homicide among black males just is higher than death by lung cancer. >> heather, i'm sorry, but i have not been good with the time, so i have to break in. >> public campaigns, i would argue that every subway in new york, if they are going to have a message, have something value ororizing fathers and change that. >> i'm chair of the california advisory committee to the commission. my question is for heather and kay, what is financing this fatherless culture?

something has changed between the moynihan report and now. professor holzer suggests a big role for the earned income tax credit and how would you modify these incentives? >> well, there are those who argue that it was welfare that financed the rise to single mootshood. there is something to that. but we had -- motherhood. there is something to that. and i thought this would change marriage rates and it has not. the assumption was that women once they found they could not rely on government money, public money, would look at men a little more carefully, the men that they had children by, more carefully as potential providers. they did not do that. they did go to work for

themselves. and did fairly well, at least on average. there are some problems still at the margins. but, and, so, the answer to that is, we have had this enormous shift in the economy that harry has referred to, which has made it possible for women to have opportunities out there that they never had before and in some ways, a lot of the jocks that opened up are -- jobs that opened up are more female friendly than male friendly. what is financing single motherhood now is the service economy. >> next. >> my name is richard wilson, chair of the connecticut committee and professor of social science at uconn. we have heard all morning a

correlation or causal relationship between family structure on the one hand and educational attainment on the other. i would like you to consider the evidence to the contrary. as professor patterson mentioned this morning, in western europe, there has been a strong increase of children born out of marriage and increase in educational attainment. math scores in united kingdom, netherlands, denmark, have been going up and marriage rates have been going down. this suggests to me family structure is not the only factor and not the most important factor perhaps and we should look at the things around supporting the family that goes on in the western european model. for instance, there are very good public schools. there is universal health care, there are unemployment benefits and range of government programs that provide stability for parents, be they single parents

or not, which support the family. now, unless you're going to look at those kinds of programs and i would argue it's cheaper to educate than incarcerate, but unless you are going to spend the money to support families and provide a supportive context for families, then you are missing a lot of the picture. and i would suggest that simply to pass moral comment on family structures, well, it's cheap and free. passing moral comment is free and doesn't cost us anything. if you're not going to spend the money on providing security for families and stability, it comes across as demoralizing. >> i just have a question just related to that, because i have heard that argument multiple times and i guess for me, what is the responsibility of men?

because to me, you can say, ok -- at the end of the day, we're here in the united states, right and the reality is, there is a whole bunch of other things that go along with that in terms of the american experience. my question back is -- because i think -- how now shall we live, what's my responsibility? if i get a woman pregnant, what am i supposed to do, am i supposed to make sure that the government structure is there to take care of my child? what am i really supposed to do? because at the end of the day, that's the other piece and not what am i supposed to do if i live in europe, what am i supposed to do if i live here today. and when i here the statistics

about the young boys getting killed in the community, i'm in tears. this is the real world. tomorrow, a boy needs to hear something from someone that says how am i supposed to live as a man, now. [applause] >> and from my perspective that's what this is all about. that's the question. i'm dealing with boys today -- and they're asking me that question. i can't give them what is happening in europe. >> ok, roland. >> harry. >> this is practical every day. you have to dell them this is how you should live. >> we could carry this on later. professor holzer. >> i agree and disagree with the comment. not to get into the moralizing

piece. cow has beentation in europe is a much more stable settlement. and if we can make it as stable here as is in europe, that's fine. we don't need a priest or a rabbi to bless it. but that makes the comparison with europe. this is about fatherhood and not marriage per se. the other problem -- and i agree i think the social supports are very important, but the difficulty of trying to take the european model and put it in the united states is number one, those social structures are supported by very high tax rates than the united states. i don't see the current political system in the united states as pim willing to embrace european tax rates. and european model, they have difficulties on the employment

side, in some, not all of those countries, but the dependency of people to drop out of the labor market has been very high. i like some of the supports provided, it is not very good. it has pluses and minuses. >> we are cutting into lunch. i'm going to cut it off here unfortunately. i apologize. let's take a break for lunch. and [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by

national captioning institute] >> c-span2, one of the public affairs offerings, gays cannot live coverage of the u.s. senate. connect with us on twitter and sign up for emails at c- span.org. >> senate republicans said there will be no compromise on the bush tax cuts for the end of the year.

party leaders spoke with reporters at the capitol. x? >> good afternoon, everyone. ist is on everyone's mind whether or not we should raise taxes in the middle of our recession, that will impact 25% of the workforce and.

it is 750,000 small businesses among our most productive job- generating businesses. we have a spending problem. we spend too much. we do not have a tax problem. we do not tax too little. if we want to begin to get ourselves out of this economic trough that we are in, the only way to do that is growth the private sector. we have tried to borrow and spend it approaches for the last year and a half, and it has not worked. unemployment is still near 10%. the best way to get out of this is not raised taxes on some of

america's most productive job generators, and i am pleased to point out, there are at least five democrats in the senate that agree with us that this is a biking -- a bad idea. i hear over and the house there is a growing number of house democrats on a ladder that is thought to be -- on a letter that is going to beeps -- to be sent to the speaker. >> i will touch on one element of the debate. republicans believe is wrong to raise taxes on any american, especially in this economic downturn. the idea that some people will spend their money and that is a good way to create jobs because

if they are doing that to buy something, somebody has to make that product and some americans will get back to work. sometimes that happens. their argument on the other side is, we do not want -- we do not care about raising taxes on other people because they are going to save their money and why would we want to help people save money? that has no impact on the economy. it could not be more wrong. economists will tell you it is at least as likely to spur economic growth and create jobs when people have savings as if they must spend their money. the reason is simple. the savings are either invested in stocks or bonds or in a bank, which lends money to businesses, and when you provide capital to businesses, ordinarily what it is used for is to buy equipment or to hire people. buying equipment is the same

thing as spending money, which then can create jobs. the bottom line is whether people use their own money to buy something or to save, and that money then becomes capital for our business recovery, in either event, letting people keep more of their money is the best way to spur economic growth and create jobs in america. >> during the last five weeks in tennessee, what i heard was most frequently was something like this -- it seems like almost everything that the obama administration has tried to do from taxing job creators, the health care law, is throwing a big wet blanket on job creation. the latest example of this is the idea of raising taxes in the middle of a recession. it is a bad idea because it makes it harder to create jobs. republicans are not the only

ones who believe that. five senate democrats have already said said. today a couple more senators said they thought that. house members who are democrats are circulating that. the former budget director said in an article, no one wants to make an already stagnating jobs market worsened over the next year or two, because that would -- that is exactly what would happen if the tax cuts expire as planned. the republican position is increasing taxes in the middle of recession is a bad idea, because it makes it harder to create jobs. >> the people have thrown out is washington this -- has a spending problem, and what most of us heard during the august break from our constituents, and i heard it in south dakota, is small businesses concerned about

the increase that the democrats have planned. if you talk about income tax rates, capital gains tax rates, and the other thing i heard about in my state is the death tax, because on january 1, the death tax goes to a million dollar exemption. i had a far more i talked to in south dakota who set all will be able to do is protect a couple of a few quarters farmland and you have to liquidate the rest. that is what is in front of the american people. that is why small businesses are so reluctant to invest capital and hire new people because they know that tax increase coming around on january 1 is going to fly squarely at them, and i think if we are going to be concerned about creating jobs, the first thing we should do is raise taxes on anybody, particularly job creators in our

economy. and those are our small businesses. >> we will take a couple of questions. you are up. [unintelligible] senator reid controls the schedule and he has indicated the defense authorization bill could be brought up. it will have a number of extraneous measures in it that had nothing to do with defense. which is making it needlessly controversy all. we will have to see what happens, but we had a discussion at lunch about the democratic leader apparently wants to put the dream act in it, wants to have a discussion about the secret polls -- holes issue that has nothing to do with the defense of carmen. it is needless and

controversial. i cannot tell you how easy it will be to go forward, but it has created an element of controversy that otherwise would not have been there. [unintelligible] that is in the bill, and that is a controversial item, because the provision in the bill involves eliminating the don't ask don't tell without a study, and that has also made it pretty controversial. >> are you open to any compromise at all with regard to the tax cut for the higher brackets? [unintelligible] >> at the risk of being redundant, what we ought not to be doing is raise taxes on anybody in the middle of a recession. we know there is bipartisan agreement with that, and that is the view that all of us have,

that it should not be raising taxes on anybody in the middle of a recession. [unintelligible] you are asking a whole bunch of a hypothetical set i will not answer. you can try to get a variety of different ways. i have made it crystal clear. the republican conference believes raising taxes on anybody in the middle of a recession is a bad idea, and it is not just us. you have seven democrats who also agree with that, and that is the starting place. >> the republicans going to try to force a vote either in committee on the epa carbon regulations? >> we have already had a vote on the rakowski -- murkowski proposal, but we have had at

least one vote under the congressional review act on the process of the epa going forward with that kind of regulation. thank you all. >> welcome back, everybody. the couple of issues i want to talk to you about today. the most important thing we need to do for our economy is protect the middle class. that is what our plan has been about all year, having passed

the small business bill, at least the first run through it today is extremely important. i am extremely happy that it passed. we have a few procedural roadblocks to overcome, but this should be ok. we should finish that as soon as the republicans to allow us to do so. but the middle class, protecting it, is important. that is what our economic plan has been about all year. this week small business jobs -- that is why we are going to make permanent the tax rate for middle-class families. we should all agree at least on this much cricket what -- on this much. we can all see that the middle class can use some help. our republican colleagues are going to hold hostage the economic security of the middle class, threatening, probably so,

to raid -- to raise taxes. that is not just unfair to hard- working americans. it is bad economic policy for our nation. it would hurt our ability to make a full recovery. this week i will move to the defense authorization bill, and i would hope we could move through it without having to file closure, but the way things have been going, having filibuster's for more than 100 different pieces of legislation, i will probably have to file cloture on that. it is an important bill, but is it -- especially important this year. first of all, in this bill, we

repealed the don't ask don't tell policy. i have indicated to senator mcconnell they can have a vote trying to take that out. they can have a vote on it. i think we should choose common sense over discrimination. we will match our policy with our principles by st everyone who steps up to serve our country should be welcomed. two, also, we have large numbers of our military who are hispanic. it is important that we move forward on this legislation. i have tried to work on this. we cannot do comprehensive immigration reform. i have tried so very, very hard. i have tried different iterations of this.

republicans have left us. the dream act is important. what does it do? boys and girls to come to our country before age 16 and had been here for five years should be able to go to a state school. they do not get pell grants and all this, but if they spend a couple years and get their ged or if they had high school diploma already and many of the duke and the complete a couple years of college, they can have their status readjusted. the need a green card. they go into military service, for two years, they get a green card. that is what the dream is all about. these are the two amendments that i have told senator mcconnell i think are a central

to the defense authorization bill. i hope they let us move through it. it is extremely important we get this done. [unintelligible] i am not going to get into a battle of the polls today. [unintelligible] are you going to let me answer the question? thanks. i am not going to get into a battle of the polls today. i have one of the finest pollsters in america. i am satisfied where i am in the polls today. >> the support the president's tax plan and would you vote for increasing taxes on families making over $250,000 a year? >> we are quite have a procedure during this period of time. i have worked with senator

mcconnell to come up with reasonable approaches to the tax issues. we have to issues. one is taking care of the middle class. the other is taking care of the millionaires. it is pretty easy to figure out where i am on that. [unintelligible] i support $250,000. i have said so many times. i should hope so perry ed [unintelligible] i do not think we should talk about how beneficial the dream that is for democrats. we should talk about how fair it is the people who should be able to go to school if they want to, to join the military if they want to. it has nothing to do about democrats and republicans. [unintelligible]

pardon me? we will sure find out. [unintelligible] it will certainly be the right thing to do and only one way of finding out, and that is to take a vote on it. i think democrats all support that perry -- support that. [unintelligible] i am not sure. he filed a bill last night. i am not sure what he is talking about as a compromise. [unintelligible] i think it is important we do everything we can to protect the middle class.

we are united. the democratic caucus is indicted in cutting taxes for small businesses. i would hope the republicans would not hold hostages the middle class tax cuts to give away to millionaires and billionaires. [unintelligible] no. what? on food safety legislation, i thought we had already cleared. there is still a republican senators say no. we hope within the next 24 hours he will say yes. that is where we are. .

>> on tomorrow morning's "washington journal," we will talk about extending the middle class tax cuts. after that arlen specter on plans to reducing defense spending by $100 billion over the next five years. after that, a discussion on the move of the wall street regulation bill. each morning at 7:00 eastern here on c-span. later in the morning, c-span3, epa executive on the gulf of mexico will -- oil safety. he is testifying at the british house of commons. live coverage at 10:15 a.m. eastern.

>> warren brown writes a column weekly for "the washington post." >> it is arguable that we would not have a black middle class if we did not have general motors, ford, and chrysler. >> in 2008, he supported government bailout for the car industry. sunday night, 8:00 p.m., on c- "q and a." >> good afternoon, ladies and gentleman.

we will now proceed with a hearing on the subject of rape. this hearing has been requested by the women's law project, following an extensive series of articles by newspapers and many leading united states cities, commenting about the inaccuracies on reports of rape. this is a six -- the statistics are staggering. over 20 million women or 18% of all within in united states have

been victims of rape, and each year approximately 1,100,000 more women are victims of rape. the statistics show that 20% of the forcible rapes have the guns under the age of 12, and 27% of forcible rapes are between the ages of 12 to 17. reportedly, only 18% of forcible rapes are reported to the police. when i took a look at the statistics i wondered how they were gathered and how accurate they were on the subject this sensitive," and i am advised that the studies conducted in 1990 or the year 2005, the national women's study, and the

national women's study replication, are reliable statistics following state of the art survey techniques when interviewing women that are remarkably more sensitive and accurate and used in other surveys, including the government cost national crime victimization survey. there have been a series of articles in the major united states newspapers, the philadelphia experience showed that there were approximately one-third of all sex crimes reported in philadelphia which were not investigated by the police.

if there was an audit conducted and it showed that some 2300 sexual assault cases had been incorrectly handled, the philadelphia police department changed their approach to bring in women to review the files using transparency and requiring that the before matter was reported, they soon found that it was filed by two police officers. as i have taken a look at these statistics, i found that times have not changed very much from the days that i was an assistant district attorney, some years ago. when i was elected district attorney in 1965, i instituted a change and procedures and established a special rate unit.

at that time, rape complainants were interviewed in a regular detective room where they had dozen or more desks. witnesses were interviewed in hearing range of many people, not conducive for a victim of rape. i changed that policy. we made those interviews privately conducted. at that time, photographs were taken to -- no pun photographs were taken to preserve trauma. it looks like me -- a look set to me like it is still a big issue. this afternoon, we're here to focus attention to see what is going on or what changes ought to be made.

for starters, i note that the definition of rape which has been used as the fbi is antiquated, not conclusive as to what it ought to be. we turn now to our first witness who is a director of the department of justice's office on violence against women. in this role, she serves as liaison between the department and federal and state governments on violent sexual assault, dating violence, and stalking. she likes to be called a director as opposed to a judge. a judgeition is sa

position. welcome, director carbon. the floor is yours for five minutes. >> good afternoon. it is an honor to be here this afternoon. i'll let you think you and the committee for conducting this hearing today to draw attention to the dehumanizing issue of sexual assault and how this dangers crime is treated in our country. as the committee knows well, sexual assault is a complex crime that affects every sector of our society, children, girls and boys, are molested by family members. college freshmen are date raped. others are attacked in their homes. sexual assault knows no gender, geographical location, -- none of us is immune.

the challenge we face is to meet the needs of an incredibly diverse population of victims while, at the same time, prosecuting offenders of these heinous crimes. we are uncomfortable talking about incest or thinking that our grandmothers could be raped. misconceptions about, not the least of which is that real rate is only committed by strangers in dark alleys. to the contrary, most victims know their attackers. no weapons are used. and the alcohol and drugs are frequently involved. these cannot stop at the doors of the police department, the prosecutor's office, or the courtroom. they impact the way all of us respond to sexual violence and this must be changed. to bring justice for victims and accountability for perpetrators, we must move the national conscience through meaningful dialogue. today's hearing is a step in the right direction and we commend

the united states congress for its leadership toward this moral imperative. in my testimony today, i hope to provide a broader context for the scope of sexual assault and they're called -- and their collective responses to it. first, it is difficult to quantify the crime. studies using different definitions of rape and different data collection methods. some include only forcible rape or only rape that is reported to law enforcement. our terminology is confusing as well. sometimes, we talk about rate. sometimes it is sexual assault and other times sexual violence. that being said, researchers estimate that about 18% of women in the united states report having been raped at some point in their lives. for some populations, rape and sexual violence is even higher. nearly one in three -- i repeat -- nearly one in three american indian or alaskan native women will be sexually assaulted in

her lifetime. sexual assault as one of the most underreported crimes in america. the bureau of justice statistics reports that the majority of rape and sexual assaults of women and girls between 1992 and 2000 were not reported to law enforcement. reasons for not reporting include fear of not being believed, a lack of trust in the criminal justice system, fear of retaliation or embarrassment, being too traumatized to report, were self blame and guilt. second, there is dramatic differences in the way the book -- the way police departments, a prosecutors' offices, and even courts respond to this crime across the country. some communities have highly trained coordinated teams of primary and secondary responders from health, law enforcement, legal and victim services sectors. you will be hearing from subsequent panels this afternoon that, and other places, victims

are subjected to a humiliating interrogations' and are treated with suspicion by law enforcement. collected evidence may said for months or even years without being analyzed. in some areas of the country, there simply are no services. it is a matter of absolute national integrity that we improve the criminal justice response to sexual violence. but let me clearly -- let me be clear when i say so. we cannot focus on one element of the criminal justice system, whether is enforcement or quartered trees to fix the problem. instead, we need to examine what it is about our system that keeps women from reporting these crimes. when the violence against women act was passed 16 years ago, sexual violence was included, but it took a backseat to domestic violence. it is time that we devote the same intense level public awareness, services, and training to address this insidious problem as we have

with domestic violence. victims of sexual assault deserve no less. wheat -- with support from congress, the program is being funded. it is the first program to provide services to victims of sexual assault. we have programs on campuses across the country. we also have law-enforcement training programs and we're working to provide protocol for medical examiners and in tribal communities as well. we're training judges as well. when i started at obw, akin with a list of priorities that i hoped would be impressed by our office -- i came with a list of priorities that i hoped would be iintegrated by our office. and there have been.

-- and they have been. i want to thank the committee for being at the forefront of ensuring that the devastating crime of sexual assault receives the serious attention that it deserves. thank you for your time this afternoon. >> thank you, director carbon. when you talk about reasons for not reporting rape and you comment that people are uncomfortable talking about rape, why do you think that is so in our society where there is so much generalize talk about sex -- generalized talk about sex and it is so pervasive even in the public media? why should that persist, people being embarrassed about talking

about this subject? >> you are absolutely right. the subject of sex is talked about a lot. but the concept of sexual violence is not discussed. people have a hard time tha understanding the nature of sexual violence. we have a tendency to blame the victim for having caused it. we have a culture which, in many respects, we condone violence. >> pause for a moment. on the issue by concern -- on the issue of concern by the victim about the charge of having caused it, why should that be the case? >> let me share a story that i recall from my days in wisconsin many years ago. there was a new trial of a young woman, 18 years old, at the college campus of the university of wisconsin at madison. she did -- she accused an individual of raping her. the trial ensued and the judge

accused the woman of inviting the rape because, at that time, she was wearing a short skirt. this judge, it turns out, happened to be recalled. that is an unusual process. this judge was recalled by the wisconsin electorate over their outrage -- over outrage that the judge had blamed the victim. but was 35 years ago. we tend to look at victims and hold them responsible. did they want someone should not have what? did they have a drink at a bar? did they go home with some additions not have gone home with? we look at what the victim did and we do not look at what the perpetrator did. >> let me move on to your comment about concerns about prevention of sexual violence. that, of course, is an entirely different phase from reporting

and investigating and prosecuting. >> in my view, when i talk about sexual violence, i talk about the trilogy, if you will, the need for effective prevention, effective intervention when we provide services, and then treatment. we talked so much overtime about appropriate service is when we intervene in a crime, but i think it is time we rewind that script and come back to start preventing sexual violence so that we will prevent victims from ever becoming victims. we have a number prevention programs through some of our cramps -- some of our grants. >> tell us some of your ideas on how to prevent sexual violence. >> i think we need to launch a prevention campaign awareness. >> people are aware of what rate means and people are aware of what is violence and anti- social. how do you prevent it?

>> we prevented by educating people about the fact that rate is a crime and that sexual assault is a crime. people get very confused with mixed messages that we sent when we look at the media, at sports, and entertainment and we see women in very degrading roles. we assume that women are inviting this when they are not. >> in the limited time i have remaining, let me move to another subject. the role of women's organizations in checking on police practices, we will hear from philadelphia police commissioner later. but they have programs of transparency where women's groups come in and review files to make it up an independent determination. there is nothing like oversight to have people on their toes and

the discharging of their official duties. how would you fashion a program where a woman's organization, which we have in all the big cities and many small towns, working with the police department and having women looking at the files and comment? >> i think they will hear about this in more detail from those organizations this afternoon. from a court standpoint, i have not been privy to how they have actually run the program with law enforcement. by opening our records, the principle of having opened access to our files, without violating confidentiality, is the way we, public officials, can be held accountable for what we do. by reviewing the files and

assessing the evidence that is in the files, to determine whether there is a basis for prosecution, that is one good way. through all the work that we do under the violence against women act, we talk about coordinated community response. any time can bring in partnerships to improve their work, bringing advocates to work with those professionals, i think we get a better outcome and more safety for victims. >> the red light went on during your answer. >> i want to thank you for holding this hearing. i think one of the most important functions of our committee is to oversight what is happening on the enforcement of our laws. yes, most of the prosecution investigations for sexual assaults are done at the state and local level. it is important that the senate ride to the oversight to make sure that our laws are being handled in an appropriate

manner. i'm convinced that sexual assaults are at a much lower number from the point of view of prosecution than other criminal activities. we are not doing an appropriate job nationwide on helping those that are victimized in reporting the incident, investigating it, and prosecuting it. when you look at the numbers, there is reason to be concerned. in baltimore, we had the highest rate of unfounded cases in the nation. when you determine, at the police level, there is an unfounded case, it generally means that you do not believe the victim. there is really no evidence to support the numbers that we had in baltimore. the "baltimore sun" put a spotlight on this. as a result, there was action and attention was paid.

all of a sudden, the number of cases went up dramatically in baltimore. that was not because there were more cases, but because there were not treating it the way that they should or they are starting to do that. a question for you is what are you doing in order to try to see whether we can get accurate information nationwide? do we have a common set of information that the number of cases that are being followed up, that there is adequate training to local police to handle this, how you are setting -- how your helping setup the response teams to help these victims during these extremely difficult times? we can have a common set of numbers nationwide in order to be able to set up the right programs at the national level to assist local law enforcement to help those who have been victimized through sexual assaults and to make sure that those who are perpetrators are held accountable. >> those are great questions.

this is obviously the subject of the hearing today. we have many different community providers and many training programs for all of our various professions. in particular, on law enforcement, we have a number programs that are designed to educate from the top down and the bottom up. we have training programs for police chiefs. we have other programs that have training curricula, whether it is all mine or like training, to teach officers on how to investigate cases and how to report, understanding how to conduct interviews, understanding how to clear cases. one of the most important things we can do is have a common understanding around terminology. different states and different police department's define different crimes in different ways. i would urge that there would be

some common terminology so that we can compare apples and apples and oranges and oranges as we go through. that is one of the challenges we have that would be helpful to be addressed. >> i think that is a recommendation that we need to take a close look at. , they mayrisdictions ma look at sexual assaults and there are different levels and different terms that are used. what concerns me is the numbers as to how police department's record unfounded reports, the ones they do not follow what on. do you have statistical information that could help us as to whether certain jurisdictions are just dismissing out of hand complaints that are being filed on a very arbitrary basis? do we have any information to be able to take a look at what is happening? there are so many cases in which police are brought in and

they're not even sent to investigate. it is not sent to a detective or sent to the prosecutors. decisions are made by responded police officers to not take it any for them. in baltimore, the required reports to be filed. at least now, we're getting second looks at these to make sure there is a follow-up. i am concerned that, in other areas in this nation, we may not be hitting the radar screen. >> the research suggests that the number of truly unfounded cases is somewhere between 2% or 7%. the number of truly unfounded is really small. some of the steps they are taking in law enforcement agencies across the country is to do what you're suggesting. number one, that we document the report of every incident instead of just closing the case of not reporting everything.

it is important that they have a supervisor review the report to ensure that there either is evidence to move forward on or not or what additional steps need to be taken. additional reporting requirements coupled with intensive training, we will get a better outcome. kudos to the department's their willing to do this. by doing so, you're undoubtedly went to see a rise in the numbers that are reported. there may not be a difference in the crime rate because we are actually disclosing what has been happening, what has been hidden from public view. >> i agree with that. i think it is very important. i think we have to have a common set of numbers. we have to know what is happening. unless there is a consistent interpretation of these reports, as to whether they should be investigated and recommended for prosecution, then we really do not have a grip on what is happening nationwide.

>> thank you. >> senator frank and. >> thank you mr. chairman for agonizing this very important hearing, for allowing me to attend. i am not on the subcommittee, but you opened it to every member of the judiciary committee. director carbon, i want to talk about rape kits. as you mentioned in your written testimony, when congress passed bawa in 1984, it tried to make sure that victims would not bear the cost of the forensic exams .ha the problem is that some jurisdictions are still billing victims for their rate kits and leaving it to the victims to get reimbursed by insurers or victims funds. without objection, mr. chairman,

i would like to add to the record and fuel -- add to the record four articles that document does. >> without objection, there will be made part of the record. >> to me, the real problem is that this practice is actually legal under federal law. it is legal to billy victim for her rape kit and the largest -- to build a victim for rape kit and the law just says that they just have to reimburse her. in the past, it was thought this was a bad policy. faq issued by your office says that women strongly encourage states to not require victims to file a claim with their insurers. wednesday's do this, they may inadvertently and form -- when states do this, they may inadvertently and form their

families. can you collaborate -- inform their families. can you elaborate on this? >> in my view, i would like to share with you an amendment. for the committee's benefit, when it was reauthorized in 2005, in part, to address that, there was the concern that many victims may have been raped a long time ago and they may not want that information shared. they may have elected not to prosecute for whatever reason. in 2005, when the violence against women act was recertified, the certification was changed to have states pay for the examination. but that was conditioned on a couple of things. one is that the victim not be required to submit it to her insurance carrier and that the

examination be done by a trained professional. having -- the loophole is there, which you identified. we are doing training. we have had one of our technical assistance providers screen all of the jurisdictions to ensure that there is -- that they are in compliance with the law. and they are. but that is not to say that we cannot do a better job for that the statute cannot be strengthened to prevent any disclosure for a victim. even though the statute has improved from 2005, people are always looking for ways to do the job better. >> you said there was a loophole in the law. even the good part of the law is not being -- is not followed. it says that the victim should be given a free trade kitt -- free rape kit.

here is one news clip from last may, which without objection, i were also like to add to the record. >> it will be made a part of the record without objection. >> the payment was made to the hospital. when she submitted the $1,847 worth of remaining bills to the crime victims' fund, she received a denial letter, telling her that law enforcement should have paid. director carmen, enforcement of this law does fall -- director carbon, enforcement of this law does fall under the jurisdiction of the justice department. can you ensure that rape victims are not having to pay for their rape exams? >> i will certainly look into that.

they should not have to pay for their exams. >> thank you so much. >> thank you so much, senator franken. >> hello. i just came in. [laughter] i have been in the impeachment hearings. it is kind of nice to leave the state of louisiana for a little bit and come here. so thank you. >> you have the floor. >> we have been talking about a lot of things. it is good to be here. i know that there has been progress made in addressing this crime in metropolitan areas. as chief prosecutor in harrison county, which includes minneapolis and 45 suburbs, can

you talk about rural areas. i saw this vast difference between the resources and the knowledge and the tools that rural jurisdictions have compared to metropolitan areas. >> having-returned from a trip to alaska, i can talk to you about rural -- having just returned from a trip to alaska, i can talk to you about rural jurisdictions. that is extra-roll. >> alaska is twice the size of texas and has the population of vermont. in response to the more general question of rural programs, there are many programs that we find that provide services in rural communities. one of them is the rule sexual

assault program so that we can provide services that are specific in those communities. there is also a new demonstration program which we're finding, call the sexual assault demonstration initiative. it will be designed to provide enhanced services for doing coalitions that have traditionally not been providing sexual assault services, but will provide enhanced services in rural communities. in addition, we are looking to have specialized sexual assault units in their local police departments. these are very effective tools. we train local agencies to be able to respond to sexual assault cases. it has enhanced training and how to inquire of the victims with the need to be sensitive to victims and not put them in a position where they will then

feel as though they must assume responsibility for the crime. this is in our rural programs and campus programs. the sexual assault services program is the first that is dedicated solely to sexual assault services. those apply in rural areas as well. it is extremely important that we have appropriate advocacy in rural areas and that their work with law enforcement and prosecution as well. -- and that they work with law enforcement and prosecution as well. >> your report that 25% of high- school girls and 5% of high- school boys reports some sort of rape or intercourse. what is your department doing to address rape at the high school level and on to college? >> assault of teenagers and on

college campuses is one of the most serious problems we have. the more that we look what is going on in this study, we find that it is happening at earlier and earlier ages. 16 years ago, when the act was adopted, we did not even contemplate teen violence. we talk about teen dating violence, but it is not dating violence because kids do not date. it is really sexual assault in those relationships. we have a program in partnership with the ad council and the family violence protection fund. it is a website where teenagers can go online and talk peer-to- peer to talk about how to address what is happening in their relationships so they can be safer or whom they can turn to two for help -- turn to for help. on college campuses, we have never providers, including one which we have here, the security on campus program.

we are doing lots of training on college campuses. the department of justice just completed a campus tour in march to highlight what is going on in college campuses around the country and the importance of starting new programs. in my home state of new hampshire, we are funding a program which is the bystander intervention program. that is so college campuses and students know they can do to intervene safely when they observe an incident about to happen or one which may have happened. college students have developed their own campaign ads to post on all of the buses going around campus. they have their own bill bollards saying, watch out if this happens or do you know about this or whatever it may be. >> i don't mean to cut you off. the cyber issue, have you looked into that? i have a bill with senator hutchison and i also have health offers. we have been working with the

espn reporter who was stopped. i think it is good that you're going for cyber stocking. but have you looked at the cyber issue and how that relates to sexual assault issues on colleges and high schools with kids. -- with kids? >> it is a big part of that. it is an important piece of the overall puzzle. parents are not aware in some of the ways that their kids are being stalked. that is part of the training programs that we have. >> all right. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. >> we will move now to the next panel. we have carol tracy, commissioner ramsey, michele raheem devaughn. our first witness is miss carol

tracy, the executive director of the women's law project in philadelphia. she is a lecturer at the university town of -- university pennsylvania, a graduate of the university of pennsylvania, and a law degree from chapel university. we have a very large number of witnesses, nine in total. we will have to observe the time limits very closely. miss tracey, the floor is yours for five minutes. >> thank you. thank you for responding to my request for having this hearing and thank you to the members of the panel for being here. we believe that it is critically important that congress address the complaints that are being made, the police departments around the u.s. army's handling rates and other sex crimes. we think it is essential that this committee review the serious inadequacy of the federal bureau of investigation's uniform crime program, both in its definition

of rape and in the assessment of the quality of rape data reported by local law enforcement agencies. the women's law project first became involved in addressing police mishandling of sex crimes in the fall of 1999 when the philadelphia inquirer published an investigative series that you described earlier, senator specter. massive reforms have taken place in philadelphia since that time, including an invitation for advocacy groups to review case files. 10 years later, we and other advocates continue to conduct an annual case review. it is a very strong collaborative reform effort and continues under the able leadership of commissioner ramsey. we recognize the need for constant vigilance and cooperation. we believe we have a successful partnership in philadelphia. because of the role we have played, journalists have contacts made as you have contacted me from all over the

country. "the baltimore sun" reported that the number of baltimore rape cases reported to the fbi has declined by 80%. since 1991, the percentage of unfounded rate cases has tripled. from 2003 to 2010, police reports foreign tain -- inf -- police reports were only four in 10 cases. many journals reported data like this. this translated to horrifying details. a cleveland and victim was found to be "non credible" after she filed a claim that she was raped by a man who had spent 15 years

in jail for a rape charge. she was bleeding when she fight down a police cruiser and provided the police the detailed information about the assailant. police eventually found the remains of 11 women at his home. milwaukee and baltimore, philadelphia, we have all heard stories like that. i thought that the reports of egregious police misconduct were isolated events. but we're seeing systemic pattern of police refusing to accept cases for investigation, ms. classified cases to a non- criminal categories so that investigations to not occur, and then founding complaints by determining that women are lying about being sexually assaulted. victims are inserted like they're criminals, are threatened with lie-detector tests or arrests, and are blamed for the averages, but the perpetrators. i want to move now to the

uniform crime report. the ucr defines and publicizes the incidents of sex crimes. it is supposed to be the authoritative source that is nationally representative of sexual crime. congress allocates federal funds to states and localities based on this. this data is so inaccurate on rape, like other data that the ucr reports, that it cannot be used. the definition is totally inadequate. forcible rape is defined as the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will. this definition has been unchanged since 1927 and is exceedingly narrow and does not reflect how america has significantly expanded their understanding of rape. states have relied -- states

have revised their lost accordingly. it is now recognized that all forms of non consensual sexual penetration, regardless of motive, relationship, or morta transportation is included. yet the narrow definition continues. we wrote to the fbi in september 2000, asking them to change the definition of rape. over 90 organizations signed on to our request. at that time, the fbi's attention was addressed to the events of 911 -- 9/11. both the crisis that is reported in the papers hand in this hearing will bring about the necessary change. rick is a heinous crime, second only to murder in -- rape is a heinous crime, second only to murder in its severity. a police do not regard the complaints of rape as crimes,

they are further endangering the public as sexual predators' remain free to continue to read other victims. >> how much longer do you need? >> at the end. we recommend the following steps. please direct a theucr to update -- please direct the ucr to update the definition of rape. continue the support of the buyout -- of the office of violence against women. we just want to make enough that we should all be grateful to the press. if it were not for the press reporting these, we would not be here today. >> we will now go to commissioner ramsey. he was for eight years the police commissioner of washington, d.c. thank you for joining us,

commissioner ramsey. we look forward to your testimony. >> thank you and good afternoon. i want to thank you for the opportunity to appear here and talk about this critically important topic. i firmly believe that partnerships between law enforcement agencies and our social service prevention and victim advocacy counterparts are absolutely essential in addressing some of the most pressing issues that confront us. i will be brief in this testimony and share the most relevant lessons learned from our history in the philadelphia police department on how rate has been reported and investigated. the delivered downgrading of rape cases in the philadelphia police department in 1990 exposed the white hidden practice.

-- exposed the widely hidden practice. consequently, it took a comprehensive and relentless approach to address this. many important corrective actions were taken at all levels, from training, report writing, interviewing, and it required changing leadership, adjusting staff levels, accepting oversight, and partnering with advocacy groups. the department has had the same commander since the year 2000. a number of seasoned investigators were also transferred into the unit to increased the staffing level. our partners have also remained in their positions. carol tracy has been in the women's law project since these changes were implemented. once a year, she appears and other organizations come to the svuyou project -- to the sc office.

on a daily basis, these organizations are in costa communication with -- in constant communication with personnel at svu. i credit all the personnel for their persistence and dedication to their jobs. there are thousands of people who help deal with this dramatic crime. i cannot overstate the importance of this collaboration and how rape was and is now investigated by this department. the philadelphia police the parma put measures and to pledge that have been helpful in establishing trust and promoting a culture that treats a victim of rape with dignity and respect. there will always be room for improvement. that is the core principle of how we will move forward in the future. it iit is critical that

we deal with victims in a way that is compassionate. i would urge others to focus on this aspect on how we report and investigate rape and sexual assault. do not do it alone. and but you're in state college to be part of this process -- invite your stakeholders to be part of this process. working with our medical >> a crisis is often at the catalyst for real and system and change, such as is the case in philadelphia. police department can also learn from each other in organizations like the executive research forum. i am pleased to announce today that as the president, we will convene an executive session in

early 2011 for police leaders, mental health professionals and advocacy groups to discuss the current state of sexual assault allegations. based on the results, we will partner with our colleagues in and and a fine best practices in the investigative process. thank you, sir, for your time today. i look forward to answering any questions you might have. >> thank you very much, mr. ramsey. we turn now to mr. reed, who had an extraordinary experience, having been -- miss sarah read, who had an extraordinary experience, having been raped by a serial offender, not believed by the police said jail and later exonerated when the serial rapist was caught in other similar situations and engaged in significant litigation, which was upheld by the court of appeals for the third circuit.

thank you for joining us. for five minutes, we want to hear what happened to you. >> i was working a shift by myself. at about 10:40 p.m., a man walked to the counter and pulled a gun out and pointed at me. demand that i sit on the floor. the question about how to -- he questioned me about how to open the cash register drawer. the camera on the counter and held the gun on me at -- he came around the counter and held the gun on me and said if i did not give him oral sex he would shoot me. i have one of the employees, or one and report the crime. i stayed in the shop, where

several officer showed, and i gave them a description of the attacker and my account of the assault. naturally afterward, and -- shortly afterward and was taken to detective edinson. i began to retell the events to detective edwards and accurate and when what he asked me how many times a day i use heroin. soon, his attitude became very aggressive toward me. he asked me, is where i had put the money or where it was. he told me if i confess, things would go a lot easier for me. get one. micah very upset and was crying and he told me that my tears -- at one point, i got very upset and was crying and he told me that my tears would not help me. i was asked to give a written statement. when i arrived at the police station, i was put in a small conference room.

detective edinson took my parents in another room and began questioning them about me. at one point, responded to his accusations that i responded -- that i wanted to go all away. two months after are was assaulted, another woman was sexually assaulted within 2 miles of my attack. detective edinson was assigned to this case. this woman gave almost the exact same description of her attacker, and his m.o., as i had. unfortunately, he was still unable to make the connection because he was accusing me. the stored outside my house, asking me to change my written statement and confessed to the crime. after almost 45 minutes at my house, the only thing he managed to do was to embarrass me in front of my neighbors and read

victimize me. on sunday, january 14, 2005, a warrant for my arrest was issued for theft for receiving stolen property and filing a false police report. on thursday, january 28, i turned myself in. i was given a straight cash bond because according to detective ed minton i was a flight risk. i spend the next five weeks in jail waiting for a bond release. this all happened while i was four months part with my first child. and while awaiting trial, i contacted the state of line for serial rapist. i contacted an officer and told my was assaulted and that i believed her was a sane man they were looking for. i was also wrote explaining that i was not in tears before the crime. 13 months after this the man was arrested. he was caught in the act to sexually assaulting a gas

station attendant. after being placed under arrest, he admitted to 12 different sexual assaults. one of those assaults was me. i was able to call my lawyer, who called detective edmonton, who confirmed that there was a convention and my charges would be dropped. my experience left me concern that i would never be able to rely on an officer to do his job because of a detective refusal tos cooperate and believe me. thank you. no. thank you very much for sharing data in various with us -- >> thank you very much for sharing that experience with us. our next speaker is also a rape victim in florida. in 2002, she was attacked by the so-called day care rapist while

speaking of her children at day care in miami dade county. she later appeared on america's most wanted. thank you for appearing. merika thank you very much. good afternoon, chairman specter and distinguished members of the committee. thank you for the opportunity to participate in today's hearing. i hope that'll this empowers you to fight this crime. the investigation of rape will happen only when we are committed to providing it does with comprehensive support services, from the first 911 call all the way through to sentencing. my story supports this. the support services by sustained through the longest, most grueling years of my life, at times giving up seemed the best thing to do. i was raised in miami, fla., and graduated from the university of virginia and spent a brief time here in washington working for the department of justice.

after graduate school i got married and my husband and dial chose to -- by husband and i chose to settle down in the same miami area where i have grown up. one afternoon i went to pick up my 3-year-old daughter, emily amar from the church preschool around the corner from the house. i buckled my son into his car seat and as i was doing this, i was ambushed from behind and hit on the head. as my daughter screen for life and thought to escape an advance, my assailant held a knife to my neck and drown out the -- entered a three-year to drown out the south of my children's cries. he said, ma'am, do you believe in god? i said, yes, and he said, good, because then you can forgive me for what i'm about to do to you and your children he then drove us out of town.

he beat me, held a knife to my neck and read to me four times. each time i was violently raped, he forced both of my joy and to watch every moment of the crime. my daughter was forced to sit inches for me as i screamed in pain during the brutal assault. when he was done with me, he drove me to two atm's machines and asked me to withdraw money. he told me to buy down all the services of the car with my underwear -- wipe down all of these surfaces of the car with my underwear to erase fingerprints. he made me kneeled down and made my daughter back for my life. -- bad for my life. he then casually open the door and walked away. i immediately went to my parents' house. they begged me to call 911. although i was afraid of what he might do to me or my family, i called the police.

the compassionate experience with the police officer set the tone for how i might feel from that moment on. and without that encouraging beginning, my story might have ended quite differently. painfully, the nurses at the -- thankfully, the nurses at the rate crisis center in new how to gently deal with me. the forensic nurse who stood by my side help me deal with the pain pure -- with the pain. after the raid, i received a call informing me that a tiny speck of dna had been recovered on my clothing. it matched the dna from another crime, but unfortunately the information was not in the system. out of millions of people my attacker could be anyone. my relationship with the detectives in this case served

as a source of strength for me in the agonizing months after my rape. because they check in on me, i felt like they were personally invested and this gave me the strength i needed to continue forward. by a stroke of luck and could police work, my rapist was finally identified. he was, beating up his pregnant girlfriend at a hotel. he was printed and checked for dna. i knew who my attacker was. i finally thought it was over, but i did not realize the interest to us was just beginning. after his arrest, i was thrown headfirst in a complex legal system that was foreign to me. the first 18 months after my rapist capture -- after my rapist was captured, there was delayed. i felt hopeless. the team was amazing and they promptly return my phone calls and helped me to see everything

as well as the bigger picture, which was just as for my family. in october 2006, my trial began. it took years of work to get to this point. facing a rapist in court was extremely difficult, not just for me, but for my family. the compassionate care from the state attorney's office was especially valuable for my mother as she prepared to testify. finally, for nearly two hours at the stand and described in graphic detail all of the despicable details to a roomful of strangers. the jury deliberated for two and a half hours. i held my breath as they came to their decision, guilty on three counts of armed kidnapping, and guilty on four counts of rape and kill the on one count of robbery. i told the judge how the rapist had destroyed the life i wanted for my family. i told him how he for such deceit -- to leave the city and friends and family we left because we did not feel safe.

the judge sentenced him to seven consecutive life sentences, plus 15 years for the crimes against my family. >> how much longer? >> in just a bit. the justice system can work when victims are providing the support we need. without that support, my rapist may still be free and victimizing others. these organizations must be given the funds necessary to run their hotlines and emotional support for families. seven years ago, i was naked and bleeding and i never imagined i would be here in washington as an activist. the power that a positive experience of law enforcement and a legal system can have in public life is enormous. begin by respecting all victims, providing specialized tradintrag

for law enforcement. thank you for inviting me to speak on this important topic. >> thank you very much. and finally witness on this panel is dr. korea of the founding director -- dr. gloria, the founding director for the center for girls and young women in jacksonville florida. the doctor has an extensive educational background with a bachelor's, master's, and a doctorate in public administration. we look forward to your testimony. >> thank you, chairman specter and members of this committee for inviting ncdc center for girls and young women to testimony -- testify on this important subject. >> before you proceed and i would like to recognize senator would like to recognize senator